| Google Ads help pay the expense of maintaining this site |
| ggg |
Click Here for the Neighborhood Transformation Website
|
Fair Use Disclaimer
Neighborhood Transformation is a nonprofit, noncommercial website that, at times, may contain copyrighted material that have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It makes such material available in its efforts to advance the understanding of poverty and low income distressed neighborhoods in hopes of helping to find solutions for those problems. It believes that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Persons wishing to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of their own that go beyond 'fair use' must first obtain permission from the copyright owner. |
HELP WHERE IT'S NEEDED
Federal block grants are intended for low-income areas.
Don't blame the affluent cities that snap up federal community-development funds intended for the poor. The fault lies with the rules for federal funding -- and the ingrained and unfortunate message that the federal government -- not local government -- has a major responsibility for services to the poor, the disabled and the elderly. A group of Broward nonprofit agencies and community-development corporations are challenging the distribution of $5 million designated for Broward County, its cities and the nonprofits. Part of the dispute involves which agency gets how much; the broader issue is whether these funds are going to those most in need. That's a national issue. U.S. Rep. Carrie Meek, D-Miami, already has a bill that seeks to make sure that a higher percentage goes to poor and working-poor neighborhoods. The federalization of responsibility for people left behind locally is partly a legacy from the days when only those who paid sizable property taxes could be assured of good city services, sidewalks and sewers. The poster project for the South Florida Community Development Coalition's complaint in Broward is $32,210 in renovations for a community center in Parkland. That northwest suburb has a billion-dollar tax roll, a population of only 14,000 people and an estimated $100,000 median family income, triple the county median. The renovations are dictated by the Americans With Disabilities Act. That's a federal law, but Parkland is capable of paying its own way. Other questioned projects are for senior-citizen classes in beachfront Lauderdale-by-the-Sea and a community center within a comfortable subdivision in Cooper City. Begun in 1974, federal Community Development Block Grant funds were intended to benefit low- to moderate-income people in large urban areas and to eliminate blight. In Broward, the county administers funding for some cities and the unincorporated areas; other cities apply for their own grants. The South Florida coalition is upset that the percentage flowing to its membership is shrinking, arguing that members use the dollars to leverage other grants. Regardless of who controls the dollars, the federal law itself needs reform. It requires that only 70 percent of the money be spent on behalf of low-income residents or on projects that ``principally'' benefit areas where 51 percent of residents are low income. Rep. Meek's bill would raise the threshold to 80 percent and count only those dollars that directly benefit low-income neighborhoods. The 20 percent margin is fairly generous but preserves flexibility that may be needed in redeveloping cities. But a voluntary change in local priorities for these funds would achieve the same end -- spending these fede Miami Herald Editorial, July 31, 2001
HELP WHERE IT'S NEEDED
Federal block grants are intended for low-income areas.
Don't blame the affluent cities that snap up federal community-development funds intended for the poor. The fault lies with the rules for federal funding -- and the ingrained and unfortunate message that the federal government -- not local government -- has a major responsibility for services to the poor, the disabled and the elderly. A group of Broward nonprofit agencies and community-development corporations are challenging the distribution of $5 million designated for Broward County, its cities and the nonprofits. Part of the dispute involves which agency gets how much; the broader issue is whether these funds are going to those most in need. That's a national issue. U.S. Rep. Carrie Meek, D-Miami, already has a bill that seeks to make sure that a higher percentage goes to poor and working-poor neighborhoods. The federalization of responsibility for people left behind locally is partly a legacy from the days when only those who paid sizable property taxes could be assured of good city services, sidewalks and sewers. The poster project for the South Florida Community Development Coalition's complaint in Broward is $32,210 in renovations for a community center in Parkland. That northwest suburb has a billion-dollar tax roll, a population of only 14,000 people and an estimated $100,000 median family income, triple the county median. The renovations are dictated by the Americans With Disabilities Act. That's a federal law, but Parkland is capable of paying its own way. Other questioned projects are for senior-citizen classes in beachfront Lauderdale-by-the-Sea and a community center within a comfortable subdivision in Cooper City. Begun in 1974, federal Community Development Block Grant funds were intended to benefit low- to moderate-income people in large urban areas and to eliminate blight. In Broward, the county administers funding for some cities and the unincorporated areas; other cities apply for their own grants. The South Florida coalition is upset that the percentage flowing to its membership is shrinking, arguing that members use the dollars to leverage other grants. Regardless of who controls the dollars, the federal law itself needs reform. It requires that only 70 percent of the money be spent on behalf of low-income residents or on projects that ``principally'' benefit areas where 51 percent of residents are low income. Rep. Meek's bill would raise the threshold to 80 percent and count only those dollars that directly benefit low-income neighborhoods. The 20 percent margin is fairly generous but preserves flexibility that may be needed in redeveloping cities. But a voluntary change in local priorities for these funds would achieve the same end -- spending these federal dollars in places where they will do the greatest
good and where they clearly are intended.
© 2001 The Miami Herald and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.